Md. Tauhid v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17234 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -15 Year- 2015 Thana -RAUTA District- PURNIA ====================================================== Md. Tauhid Son of late Alimuddin Resident of Village Panki PS Rauta District Purnea At Present residing at Village Bhelakhua, Ps Anagarh, District Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking bail in connection with Rauta P.S. Case No. 15 of 2015 (S.T. No. 534 of 2015) registered for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the First Information Report, the father and the Informant were returning after purchasing the essential materials. In the meantime, four accused persons intercepted them and assaulted the father of the Informant.

There is a direct allegation against the petitioner and Md. Manzir to have caused injury on the vital part of the body of the father of the Informant by knife and, on that count, the father

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17234 of 2016 (2) dt.28-04-2016 of the Informant succumbed.

From the order-sheet, it appears that the case has been committed to the court of sessions and the charge has been framed.

Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Md. Tauhid is rejected.

The court below is directed to conclude the trial within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of this order.

If the trial is not concluded with the aforementioned period of nine moths, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Rishi/- U T